Britain Demands Iran Free Seized Sailors

AP ^ | Friday, Mar. 23, 2007

[uksupport1]

The UK did not go out of their way to avoid confrontation with insurgents. That is utter nonsense. For a small force in Iraq we have done the best that we could. Have a look at the many dozens of gallantry medals given to British troops in Iraq. The south of Iraq is in a better state than most US zones. Perhaps you should sort out your own sectors before you comment on ours! Our casualties are proportional to yours in Iraq. The 'softly, softly bullcrap' is now Gen. Petraeus strategy in the Baghdad surge-and its working. Its a basic tenet of successful counterinsurgency if you care to read your history books.

The UK could easily have stood by and let the US do all the hard work in the WOT like all of your other 'allies'. They have not. We have suffered the second highest casualties in the WOT after the US. As for the rest of the 'Anglosphere', the Canadaians are doing sterling work in Afghanistan but aren't present in Iraq. The Australian government has sent token forces to Iraq and Afghanistan that haven't been involved in much fighting and (thankfully) haven't sufferent a single combat death. I have nothing but respect for the militaries of those two countries, however.

[windcliff]

Thank you for the details.

[Grimmy]

Sorry to say but you are wrong in your assessment of your forces primary strategy in the Basra area.

Basra was allowed to fall completely to Iranian backed militias. The only time UK forces engaged was in self defense when directly attacked.

UK forces have stood and watched as Iraqi citizens were beaten, sometimes to death, by Islamist code enforcers. The UK command went to extreme measures to avoid contact with the militias at all costs.

I doubt this was due to the will of your soldiers and commanders but it is what it is and now Americans will have to bleed to fix it.